M/S. Rukmani Power & Steel Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise

[Arising out of Order-In-Original No. Commissioner/RPR/CEX /23/2012 dated 22.3.2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur ]

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Hon'ble Mr. B Ravichandran , Member (Technical)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s. Rukmani Power & Steel Ltd. Appellants

Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise Respondent

& ST, Raipur

Appearance:

Shri Anil Mishra, Advocate for the Appellants

Shri Pramod Kumar, Jt.CDR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Hon'ble Mr. B Ravichandran, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing /decision: 13.08.2015

FINAL ORDER NO. A/ 52590 /2015-EX(DB)

Per Ashok Jindal :

Heard the parties.

2. The facts of the case are that appellant used certain inputs / input services for generation of electricity which is partly used by the appellant in their induction furnace and part of electricity was sold in market. The Revenue is of the view that as electricity sold outside is an exempted item from payment of duty. Therefore, the appellant is required to pay an amount 8 / 10% of the value of electricity as per Rule 6(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2004. As the issue has already been resolved in the case of Sharad SSK vs. CCE Kolhapur [2014 (9) TMI 768- CESTAT Mumbai] , wherein this Tribunal held that the amount of inputs / inputs service used in generation of electricity sold outside is reversed, the same is sufficient and in that case the assessee is not required to pay an amount equal to 8 / 10% of the value of electricity. In this case, admittedly, the appellant has already reversed the entire amount of input / inputs service used in generation of electricity, therefore, same is sufficient. Therefore, appellant is not required to pay any amount of the value of 8/ 10 % of electricity.

3. In these terms, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court )

( Ashok Jindal ) Member(Judicial)

( B Ravichandran )

Member(Technical)

ss

2